Belgian Blues are genetically double-muscled. They reach 1800-2000 lbs at two years of age. A boy was born in Germany a few years ago with the same mutation (aka Superboy).
Posted on 03/30/2007 3:48:55 PM PDT by nancyvideo
For a number of years now, a great deal of discussion has taken place among scientists and in the popular media about the genetic engineering of children.
Will it soon be possible, for prices widely affordable at least to the upper-middle class, to guarantee that children have a high IQ, or excellent athletic ability, or be over 6 feet tall, or have blond hair and blue eyes?
Is it right to commodify children in this way, and have parents choosing options as they do with cars?
And wouldn’t it be boring to live in a world someday where almost everyone is extremely intelligent and beautiful? Variety, or even the politically correct term “diversity,” is the spice of life.
(Excerpt) Read more at rightbias.com ...
Exactly right. How can preventing the carrying on of known congenital defects to a new generation be a bad thing?
If I can prevent cystic fibrosis, manic depression, cycle cell anemia, and other known inheritable diseases from passing on consider the benefits to my family and to the human race. If you have the means available to you how can you in good conscience choose not to give your child the best available start in life namely good health?
With in two or three generations these diseases could be history. I can not imagine families who have suffered the pain of these diseases not wanting to prevent them from being passed to their children.
Selecting the best available genes for your children has always been part of human nature. Technology has simply caught up with natural proclivity.
Child abuse. These people shouldn't be parents.
It is horrifying that some parents would deliberately disable their children. I mean what could be more cruel than teaching a kid to be a lib?
Amateurs and barn hobbyists breeding pets for show winning looks inevitably create lines with serious hereditary health problems. Scientific breeding as practiced in the agriculture industry is only superficially similar. The primary focus in farming is on higher production of course, but the same techniques that have dairy cows producing 10 times the milk they did 50 years ago could just as well create the strongest and most virile bulls to ever walk the earth.
Deaf/HoH ping
That case wasn't really any surprise to me. Generations of welfare people have been purposely bringing children into the world, just to collect a check, so why not go a step further and maximize their returns?
This line from the article scared me:
And wouldn’t it be boring to live in a world someday where almost everyone is extremely intelligent and beautiful?
If it weren't for stupid people, I wouldn't have a job.
I NEED STUPID PEOPLE, LOL (as long as they have jobs)
"could just as well create the strongest and most virile bulls to ever walk the earth."
Happens every day - Mr. Bull meet Mr. Electroejaculator.
"Better breeding through technology."
;-)
Did you have to post that (not blaming you of course)?
The most amoral selfish people I have heard about in awhile.
There must be a special place in hell...
Stupid argument. If they had been genetically engineered they would be completely different people.
Pingout tomorrow.
Just another form of eugenics. Trying to create "perfect" people.
here's the thing...no matter how much they tinker with IQ or with "looks" - have they found a way to "make" people better people?
I'm talking about people who are decent, honest, compassionate people.
There are plenty of "disable" folks with broken bodies who are great assets to this world because they are good people.
There are plenty of healthy smart folks who are jerks.
So it comes down to "who" defines what perfection is and why is it beneficial.
Concentrating on how people look has given us the unnatural Hollywood culture. yuck.
concentrating on IQ still does not address personality and morals.
So even if one can determine that this particular fetus has spina bifida and - my goodness, how awful, we must abort!
No one really thinks about the perfectly formed bodies that will eventually grow up to be the bore at all the parties bragging about his salary.
"Great, so feel free to avoid any technology that might make your children smarter, healthier, and more attractive."
I've found that things that come at no cost are rarely appreciated. Could be it's best for children to be left alone to concentrate on developing whichever attributes they feel are important. As we see by this current 'me' generation, the results of giving your child everything can be quite negative...IMHO: Take a clue from China and don't mess with Mother Nature.
It was longer ago than that. The only problem I really have with it is that there are deaf children in the US they could have adopted. It's only disgusting, IMHO, that they had to do in vitro when plently of deaf kids need homes. If you don't know any deaf people, then I would not expect their joy to be understood. I am sure you have characteristics that you have, maybe you have gorgeous hair of 20/20 vision - that you want your kids to inherit. This is very similar.
Sorry, but I just don't see my kid who is deaf as defective. I know many many deaf people, and many deaf children who have other issues. And none of them are defective.
Selfishness. They want their kids to be of their likeness, right down to the genetic defects.
"....and you will be like gods.." indeed.
Please come to my house and meet my miserable kid. Please.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.